An interactional practice of registering expectation discrepancy: the use of the turn-initial token are in Japanese

References

• Aoki, H. (2010). On the use of the interjection huun in Japanese spoken discourse. Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 17, 409–422.
   Google Scholar
• Arita, Y. (2021). Display of concession: Maa-prefaced responses to polar questions in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 186, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.09.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Betz, E., & Golato, A. (2008). Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token achja. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 58–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolden, G. (2006). Little words that matter: Discourse markers ‘so’ and ‘oh’ and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 661–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00314.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolden, G. (2016). A simple da?: Affirming responses to polar questions in Russian conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 100, 40–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.07.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bristol, R., & Rossano, F. (2022). Remediation of infelicitous epistemic stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 199, 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2022.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Ford, C. (Eds.). (2004). Sound patterns in interaction: Cross-linguistic studies from conversation. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (Eds.). (1996). Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drew, P. (1997). ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(1), 69–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drew, P. (2018). Epistemics in social interaction. Discourse Studies, 20(1), 163–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734347
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endo, T. (2018). The Japanese change-of-state tokens a and aa in responsive units. Journal of Pragmatics, 123, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1978). Response Cries. Language, 54(4), 787–815.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golato, A. (2010). Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction. Discourse Studies, 12(2), 147–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609356497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1996). Transparent vision. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 370–404). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayano, K. (2013). Territories of Knowledge in Japanese Conversation [ Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Radboud University Nijmegen.
   Google Scholar
• Hayano, K. (2011). Claiming epistemic primacy: Yo-marked assessments in Japanese. In T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & A. Steensig (Eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation (pp. 58–81). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M. (2009). Marking a ‘noticing of departure’ in talk: Eh-prefaced turns in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(10), 2100–2129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M. (2012). Claiming uncertainty in recollection: A study of kke-marked utterances in Japanese conversation. Discourse Processes, 49(5), 391–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2012.673845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M., & Hayano, K. (2018). A-prefaced responses to inquiry in Japanese. In J. Heritage & M.-L. Sorjonen (Eds.), Between turn and sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages (pp. 193–223). John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hayashi, M., & Kushida, S. (2013). Responding with resistance to wh-questions in Japanese talk-in-interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 46(3), 231–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2013.810407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984b). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27(3), 291–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2012a). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 30–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2012b). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646684
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (2015). Well-prefaced turns in English conversation: A conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 88, 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J. (1984a). A change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68(1), 15–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2012). Navigating epistemic landscapes: Acquiescence, agency and resistance in ‘repetitive’ responses to polar questions. In J. P. de Ruiter (Ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives (pp. 179–192). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heritage, J., & Sorjonen, M.-L. (2018). Between turn and sequence: Turn-initial particles across languages. John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, G. (1993). Caveat speaker: Preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2601_1
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K. (1990). Conflict in Japanese conversation [ Ph.D. dissertation]. University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Kaneyasu, M. (2020). Interactional relevance of linguistic categories: Epistemic modals daroo and deshoo in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 155, 145–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, S. (2006). Emotive and interjectional uses of demonstratives ko/so/a in Japanese and i/ku/ce in Korean. Doshisha Studies in Language and Culture, 8(4), 761–790.
   Google Scholar
• Mori, J. (2006). The workings of the Japanese token hee in informing sequences: An analysis of sequential content, turn shape, and prosody. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(8), 1175–1205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morita, E., & Takagi, T. (2018). Marking “commitment to undertaking of the task at hand”: Initiating responses with eeto in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 124, 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oda, M. (1994). Chokuji to kijutsu dootee: Eego koyuu mee no kenkyuu [Interjection and descriptive identification: Study of English proper nouns]. Kazama Shobo.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 57–101). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pomerantz, A. (1978). Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction (pp. 79–112). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raymond, G. (2018). Which epistemics? Whose conversation analysis? Discourse Studies, 20(1), 57–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond, G., & Heritage, J. (2006). The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society, 35(5), 677–705. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404506060325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sacks, H. (1973/1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button & J. R. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 54–69). Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist, 70, 1075–1095. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2000). When ‘others’ initiate repair. Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 205–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.2.205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52–133). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shimotani, M. (2008). An Analysis of the reactive token eh in Japanese conversation [ Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
   Google Scholar
• Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation Analysis: An introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). The morality of knowledge in conversation. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sugiura, H. (2017). Expressing an alternative view from second position. Discourse Studies, 19(3), 291–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617701813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takagi, T., & Morita, E. (2022). Japanese maa as a meta-interactional stance marker displaying orientation to problematicity in interaction. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society, 24(2), 67–82.
   Google Scholar
• Takebayashi, S. (1996). English-Japanese learner’s pocket dictionary. Kenkyusha.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, H. (2013). The Japanese response token hee for registering the achievement of epistemic coherence. Journal of Pragmatics, 55, 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Usami, M. (2021). BTSJ-Japanese natural conversation corpus with transcripts and recordings (March, 2021), NINJAL institute-based projects: Multiple approaches to analyzing the communication of Japanese language learners.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (2006). Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(2), 150–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, R.-J. (2004). Stance in talk: A conversation analysis of mandarin final particles. Benjamins.
   Google Scholar